More proof of anti-Christian hypocrisy!

[MissileMan]

How do you know Kerry believes he's right? There exists only one interpretation of the Bible which is correct. The literal interpretation, contextually, of what we read. Anything beyond that is 'not a correct interpretation'. You are assuming Kerry actually BELIEVES and READS the Bible. I contend he cannot - he seems intelligent. Nobody with a modicum of intelligence can read the Bible, yet behave and support things the way he does; things which blatantly violate Biblical principles. I'm belittling nobody. I know Christians because of the 'fruits' in their lives. Christians know one-another by their conduct.



See, the difference is, I don't subscribe to 'my' interpretation of the Bible. I subscribe to "What God wants us to know" through the bible. No need for interpretation. I have an accurate translation for the original language, and common sense. (shrug).

People use your argument when they are afraid of conviction.

I'm no Kerry fan, but what kinds of things are you talking about that Kerry supports that violate direct biblical principles?

 

[dmp]

I'm no Kerry fan, but what kinds of things are you talking about that Kerry supports that violate direct biblical principles?

Homosexual Marriage. Abortion...to name two.

 

[rei_t_ex]

I'm saying No matter what logic I evidence to you; your ego? perhaps? is incapable of conceding.

I am more than capable of conceding to sound logic. You have attempted to present some of it, but I have found and pointed out faults in that logic. So far you have failed to address those faults. Why should I concede to faulty logic?

I'm saying you don't 'want' to learn anything here. For every argument I present, you will turn the point of the argument around, and force it to fit into one of your preset conclusions.

I have no idea how you have arrived at this conclusion. How would I have behaved, according to you, if I DID want to learn something? Merely accepted your every word as God's truth? IMHO, debate and questioning fosters learning, whereas blind acceptance is nothing but indoctrination for the weak minded. Say what you want, but it is evident reading the thread that I remain unconvinced of your position not because I am in principle opposed to shifting my position, but because you have so far failed to present a strong enough case for your position to convince anyone to shift to it. Writing off someone's valid arguments as unspecified "circular logic" is hardly very convincing...

 

[MissileMan]

Homosexual Marriage. Abortion...to name two.

Which principle covers abortion...Thou shall not kill (as in murder)?

 

[5stringJeff]

Which principle covers abortion...Thou shall not kill (as in murder)?

Bingo!

 

[MissileMan]

See, the difference is, I don't subscribe to 'my' interpretation of the Bible. I subscribe to "What God wants us to know" through the bible. No need for interpretation. I have an accurate translation for the original language, and common sense. (shrug).

And as you are equating abortion with murder, can you quote the exact passage from the bible that states, without any interpretaion required, that life begins at conception?

 

[rei_t_ex]

gop_jeff,

The argument is not quite as simple as you would have it be. I do not think that anyone condones murder. The argument rather revolves around the particular point at which a clump of cells (and that is what we all ultimately are, at ANY point of our development/life) becomes a separate life, a separate entity. After all, the kidney is also a clump of cells that is also living. However, if the doctors mishandle your kidney in the process of your donating it to a loved one and it dies, this would hardly be considered murder. Now, there are pretty strong arguments to differentiate between a kidney and a foetus, and I myself lean pro-life. However, once again I would hesitate to claim that the pro-choicers are CLEARLY wrong, and that they have absolutely NO case. They do some case. Especially when one gets into the issue of minimisation of net human suffering... But that is another issue entirely.

 

[dilloduck]

gop_jeff,

The argument is not quite as simple as you would have it be. I do not think that anyone condones murder. The argument rather revolves around the particular point at which a clump of cells (and that is what we all ultimately are, at ANY point of our development/life) becomes a separate life, a separate entity. After all, the kidney is also a clump of cells that is also living. However, if the doctors mishandle your kidney in the process of your donating it to a loved one and it dies, this would hardly be considered murder. Now, there are pretty strong arguments to differentiate between a kidney and a foetus, and I myself lean pro-life. However, once again I would hesitate to claim that the pro-choicers are CLEARLY wrong, and that they have absolutely NO case. They do some case. Especially when one gets into the issue of minimisation of net human suffering... But that is another issue entirely.

Since no one knows, why risk killing a possible soul ?

 

[rei_t_ex]

Since no one knows, why risk killing a possible soul ?

That is precisely why I lean pro-life. The best pro-choice response that I have encountered, is that from a purely realist position it is likely that a baby whose mother is willing to abort it, will likely not grow up to live a particularly happy life. Of course, there will be exceptions, but I think that this is largely true. Clearly, a foetus is incapable of lamenting its own death, so it abortion would cause it no suffering. Hence, one arrives at the conclusion, that to minimise human suffering one should allow abortion to take place. Ultimately, I believe that a human life is notably more sacred than minimisation of suffering, but I am somewhat ambivalent on the issue.

 

[dilloduck]

That is precisely why I lean pro-life. The best pro-choice response that I have encountered, is that from a purely realist position it is likely that a baby whose mother is willing to abort it, will likely not grow up to live a particularly happy life. Of course, there will be exceptions, but I think that this is largely true. Clearly, a foetus is incapable of lamenting its own death, so it abortion would cause it no suffering. Hence, one arrives at the conclusion, that to minimise human suffering one should allow abortion to take place. Ultimately, I believe that a human life is notably more sacred than minimisation of suffering, but I am somewhat ambivalent on the issue.

The child doesn't have to be raised by that mother----thousands of couple are just dying to adopt a child !!

 

[Bullypulpit]

You really need to turn in that clergyman who abused you, Bully and maybe then you can look at spirituality with a cleaner mind.

Spirituality is an entirely different thing from religion old son. Spirituality is living your beliefs...Religion is just saying the words without understanding their meaning.

 

[dilloduck]

Spirituality is an entirely different thing from religion old son. Spirituality is living your beliefs...Religion is just saying the words without understanding their meaning.

LOL old son--I like that ---Religion is merely a framework in which one develops spiritualty. Don't be so afraid of it ,Bully. People PRACTICE a religion---doesn't mean they are perfect at it--it's a process

 

[rei_t_ex]

The child doesn't have to be raised by that mother----thousands of couple are just dying to adopt a child !!

Statistics dictate otherwise. About one third of all children that can be adopted or even placed into foster homes are not, and are living in group shelters in the care of the State.

 

[Merlin1047]

Spirituality is an entirely different thing from religion old son. Spirituality is living your beliefs...Religion is just saying the words without understanding their meaning.

Bully - do you write your own dictionary, or do you just make this shit up as you go along?

 

[sagegirl]

duh...Liberals hate Christians. Christians are the only group alive today, other than White Males who cannot be justified in claiming 'hate' crimes.


Nobody cares if a Christian is offended, because those on the Left 'hate' things which are 'good'.

I sure hope you are being sarcastic.....it is very funny.

:rotflmao: